The idea was to solicit feedback, but also, presumably, to engage the public in a debate about the relative merits of the four proposals, rather than a debate about the overall merit of having a fare and toll hike at all.

The proposals also served as a useful exhibit of scary, worst-case scenarios—monthly MetroCards costing as much as $125, seven-day unlimiteds costing as much as $34—none of which look like they will come to pass. That, of course, has the handy effect of making the final proposal look more palatable.

So, for example, the M.T.A. will not ditch the multi-fare bonus, as Lhota once suggested he might. Rather, it will be reduced from 7 percent to 5 percent, and it will kick in at a lower rate ($5 versus $10), a change reportedly made to reduce the impact of the fare increase on poor riders, who tend to add money to their cards in small increments.

It's unclear at this point whether the toll and commuter rail proposals issued in October resemble the M.T.A.'s final proposal, which the board will vote on this month, and which will go into effect in March.

No matter what those look like, the suburbanites who already resent paying the existing rates, will not be pleased. That's unfortunate for the financially beleaguered M.T.A.

Without suburban legislative support for another revenue stream like congestion pricing, fares will continue to rise on a periodic basis for the foreseeable future, and riders will continue to pay them.